In September of 2017 | began communicating with Steve Bolton, Corporation Counsel, and with the
Mayor’s office about the illegal impoundment of my cat. Corporation Counsel assured me on more than
one occasion at that time that the impounding of my cat by the Police was in error, that it was not the
practice or policy of the Police to impound cats in Nashua as “strays”, and that it would not happen
again. | accepted those representations at the time they were made.
| also brought to the attention of the Mayor and Corporation Counsel the fact that the then-current
contract between the City and the Humane Society contained provisions expressly providing for the
impounding of cats (and ferrets) at the Humane Society on the basis of those animals being “strays”. See
the first page of the contract between the City and the Humane Society dated July 17, 2017 (the “Initial
Contract”) at the end of paragraph 1, enclosed as Exhibit D. My position in 2017 (which remains my
position at present} is that the provisions in the Initial Contract regarding the impounding of cats and
ferrets as “strays” were and are illegal, and, that using public funds to impound cats and ferrets as.
“strays” was and is likewise illegal. | therefore asked that the Initial Contract be revised so as to comply
with the law, inciuding during a meeting that | attended with the Mayor, his chief of staff and
Corporation Counsel in October or November of 2017. The City agreed to modify the Initial Contract to
remove the illegal provisions, and to that end a revised contract was entered into by the City and the
Humane Society dated December 17, 2017 (the “Revised Contract’) which omitted the provisions
regarding impounding cats and ferrets as “strays”. See copy of first page of the Revised Contract
enclosed as Exhibit E.
My understanding and belief is that the Mayor was personally involved in negotiation or discussions
with the Humane Society regarding entry into the Revised Contract. The Mayor obviously signed the
Revised Contract on behalf of the City. See the signatory page of the Revised Contract enclosed as part
of Exhibit E.
The Revised Contract came up for annual renewal in the summer of 2018. Inexplicably, the Mayor
and his administration submitted a proposed contract to the Finance Committee which once again
contained illegal provisions regarding impounding cats and ferrets as “strays”. The minutes of the
Finance Committee’s meeting on August 1, 2018, where the proposed contract was presented by the
Mayor, do not reveal that the Mayor disclosed to the Finance Committee that six months earlier he had
negotiated and signed the Revised Contract on behalf of the City because the Initial Contract contained
illegal provisions. Nor did the Mayor inform the Finance Committee that the proposed contract he
presented to them on August 1, 2018 contained the very same, illegal provisions regarding cats and
ferrets that had been removed per the Revised Contract. The Finance Committee approved the contract
based on the Mayor's representations, which contract is dated July 2018 (the “Current Contract”). See
the first page of the Current Contract enclosed as Exhibit F. | would also point out that the Humane
Society had already signed the Current Contract in July 2018 PRIOR to the time that the Mayor sought
the approval of the Finance Committee to award or fund the Current Contract in August 2018. Perhaps |
am mistaken on this issue, but is it proper for the Mayor to seek approval and funding for City contracts
from the Finance Committee after the contract has already been signed by a party to that contract?
